News
Tesla’s biggest rival in China: an in-depth look at the $4,200 Wuling HongGuang Mini EV
Tesla’s biggest rival in China is the Wuling HongGuang Mini EV that starts at around $4,200. Information regarding this small but impressive electric car that is a part of an SAIC, General Motors, and Wuling joint venture is vague and usually hard to come by. However, a recent video revealed several new details about the one car that has managed to outsell Tesla for the past five months.
The HongGuang Mini EV: A Quick Introduction
First delivered in July 2020, the Wuling HongGuan Mini EV is manufactured in Lizhou, Guangxi, China, and is available in two variants: one equips a 9.2 kWh battery and the other a 13.8 kWh battery. Capable of a 62 MPH top speed and only around 75 and 110 miles of range per charge, the vehicle’s base model is available for a respectable $4,200. However, a top price of around $5,600 will give you a fully-loaded version of the car complete with air conditioning and power windows, two features that are available in most cars as a standard option. This car, however, is far from standard and is an economical EV made for short trips, tight finances, and efficiency. It’s no Tesla, but it did secure over 119,250 total sales in 2020 alone, making it the second best-selling EV in the Chinese market, trailing the Tesla Model 3.
2021 has proven to be a different story, at least so far. The HongGuang Mini EV has commanded the Chinese electric vehicle sector in 2021, selling just shy of 57,000 units through February and holding a commanding lead over the second-place Model 3, which has accumulated 27,531 total sales so far this year. The affordability of the HongGuang Mini EV is proving to be a disruptor. Although it doesn’t pack the punch or performance of the Model 3, people continue to purchase the car because of its impressive price tag.
Production of the HongGuang Mini EV
As previously mentioned, the Mini EV is produced in Lizhou, Guangxi, at a small but extremely efficient facility. A new car rolls off the line every minute, and the vehicle only takes 4 hours to produce from start to finish, according to YouTuber Gwelio 60, who recently toured the factory to have an inside look at the car.
An assembly line worker at the Wuling plant. He is putting the finishing touches on the HongGuang Mini EV here. (Credit: YouTube | Gweilo 60)
There are not many parts to the car, and it is a relatively simple machine. The battery and some other basic parts that make up a car are really the only things that go under the body and chassis itself. Anything that could be considered a “luxury” is not included in the vehicle’s most basic models. It is really a car to get from point A to point B with as few issues or bells and whistles as possible.
(Credit: YouTube | Gweilo 60)
The vehicle itself is an employee at the plant. In fact, several of them are. Wuling has several HongGuang Mini EVs that haul materials, parts, and other things across the campus of the production facility completely autonomously. The cars operate under their own guidance and can sense when to stop and when to accelerate back onto their path. Gweilo 60 showed an example of how safe they are in the video by crossing the street while a HongGuang Mini EV approached. The car successfully stopped, waited for Gweilo to cross the street, and began navigating once again.
The Interior: Simple, small, and smooth
The bells and whistles are not present in this vehicle. A small dash screen and a simple radio, along with HVAC ventilation, make up the entirety of the dashboard. It is comfortable, small, sleek, and smooth, and it is just enough to keep someone comfortable during their short drive. It isn’t much, but with the low range, it’s not like someone needs excessive entertainment or features. You get what you pay for.
(Credit: YouTube | Gweilo 60)
The ride is smooth, zippy, and comfortable, according to the short review from Gweilo. It won’t go over 62 MPH, but it’s another gas car off the road, something that is always a positive. It has good suspension, it handles well, and it is a comfortable ride for any occupants, he says.
The Bottom Line: Is the Wuling HongGuang Mini EV a real “threat” to Tesla?
No, it probably isn’t a threat to Tesla because Tesla’s cars and the Wuling HongGuang Mini EV simply are not in the same realm. Comparing the car to the Model 3 is like comparing the Model 3 to the Rivian R1T: prices, purpose, and functionality are all different, and they are two cars that shouldn’t be mentioned in the same sentence. Many Tesla enthusiasts have called the Mini EV a “golf cart” because of its size and price point, and really that isn’t far off. However, the Mini EV is undoubtedly a popular vehicle, and the sales figures show that. Is it a legitimate threat to Tesla? Probably not. At least, it doesn’t seem that way. They’re just not comparable.
Tesla to sell zero cars in China by 2030, Morgan Stanley’s Jonas says
That isn’t to say that what Wuling has accomplished with this small but mighty EV isn’t impressive. The sales figures alone are incredible, and it is certainly a great indication that China is ready to buy EVs. However, it would be interesting to see if the Wuling-GM-SAIC partnership would be willing or would plan for a more competitive, luxurious, and expensive EV that would drive competition to the max in the Chinese market. China is becoming a hotbed for EVs, and the Wuling HongGuang Mini EV is driving EV sales through the roof.
Watch Gweilo 60’s full video regarding the Wuling HongGuang Mini EV below.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
